Senate appropriators released their fiscal year 2026 funding plan for Treasury, the IRS, and the SEC on November 24, 2025. The plan boosts funding for taxpayer services and maintains 2025 IRS enforcement funding levels.
The draft Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) funding bill is, overall, more generous for the IRS than Treasury’s budget request or the House budget bill (H.R. 5166). Likewise, the measure proposes flat funding for the SEC, avoiding the steep reductions envisioned under the House bill.
The House Appropriations Committee passed its FSGG funding plan in September.
IRS Funding Plan
The Senate bill would allocate $3.2 billion for taxpayer services, a bump up from the fiscal year 2025 operating plan, which provided $2.78 billion. The House bill would keep funding at 2025 levels, while Treasury’s request was for over $3.6 billion.
The Senate taxpayer services allocation includes over $251 million for the Taxpayer Advocate Service. The Senate would also provide $45 million for Community Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Matching Grants Program, $26 million for low-income taxpayer clinic grants, and $12 million for the Tax Counseling for the Elderly Program.
While the House and Treasury call for sharp cuts to the IRS enforcement budget, the Senate would maintain current funding levels of over $5.4 billion. Like the House bill, the Senate draft specifies that no more than $35 million should be used for Criminal Investigation Division investigative technology and that over $60 million should be used for the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement program.
The Senate, however, is less generous than the House in IT funding, calling for $3.19 billion versus the House’s $3.75 billion. Both chambers ask for more than Treasury, which sought just under $2.6 billion for technology and operations support – far below the $4.1 billion in the 2025 operating plan.
Absent Policy Riders
The House bill contains a policy rider that prohibits the IRS from spending funds on a “free, public electronic return-filing service” like Direct File, without prior approval from congressional appropriations and tax-writing committees. This policy rider, however, is not included in the Senate draft.
Also absent from the Senate draft is a House policy rider limiting IRS firearms and ammunitions purchases.
In addition, the Senate bill is silent on the Corporate Transparency Act. The House bill, in contrast, prohibits the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) from using funding to implement or enforce beneficial ownership reporting rules that a court finds unconstitutional or that “do not reflect Congressional intent.” The House also calls for a report on the “status and use” of previously filed beneficial ownership information.
SEC Funding Plan
The Senate panel spared the SEC from the sharp reductions contemplated in the House bill. Instead, it proposes level funding for the market regulator at $2.149 billion for the current fiscal year.
The House Appropriations Committee, in the FSGG bill it advanced in September, sought to cut the SEC’s budget to $2 billion.
Also missing from the Senate bill are a series of riders that would place new constraints on existing SEC rules or potential rulemakings, including expanded cybersecurity and climate risk disclosures.
The House blueprint, as well, seeks to intervene directly in the standard-setting work of the FASB, a body that has historically enjoyed a hands-off approach by Congress. The House bill would apply budgetary pressure to the board until it scraps Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2023-09, Income Taxes (Topic 740) Improvements to Income Tax Disclosures. The late 2023 rules, unpopular with the business lobby, expanded disclosure requirements around rate reconciliation and income taxes paid, among other changes.
The Senate bill has no such provision.
It does, however, preserve a long-standing rider, mirrored on the House side, that would bar the commission from implementing corporate political spending disclosure rules. Both bills have identical language: “None of the funds made available by this Act shall be used by the Securities and Exchange Commission to finalize, issue, or implement any rule, regulation, or order regarding the disclosure of political contributions, contributions to tax exempt organizations, or dues paid to trade associations.”
Supporters for such a rule, who also include some Democratic lawmakers and progressive activists, believe the disclosures are necessary following the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in 2010 in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which lifted restrictions on independent political expenditures by corporations and unions. The rulemaking prohibition, however, has survived for years through both Democratic and Republican administrations.
Reactions
Despite the Senate draft’s more generous allocations, Senate Appropriations Committee Vice Chair Patty Murray (D-WA) said it is still a “partisan” bill that fails to address “additional important issues.” Murray, however, said she’s “committed to reaching a bipartisan agreement on the bill in conference in the coming weeks.”
Take your tax and accounting research to the next level with Checkpoint Edge and CoCounsel. Get instant access to AI-assisted research, expert-approved answers, and cutting-edge tools like Advisory Maps and State Charts. Try it today and transform the way you work! Subscribe now and discover a smarter way to find answers.
